Legal Opinion

Ryan v. Great Northern Railway Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided June 19, 1903No. Nos. 13,425—(120)PublishedCited by 17 opinions

Action in the municipal court of Minneapolis to recover $187.50 for refusal of defendant to divert at an intermediate point a carload of merchandise forwarded over defendant’s railway line and consigned to plaintiff at Minneapolis. Thé case was tried before Dickinson, J., who found in favor of plaintiff for the sum demanded. From an or■der denying a motion for a new trial, defendant appealed. The carrier delivers at his peril when there is an outstanding bill of lading.

Read the full summary

Action in the municipal court of Minneapolis to recover $187.50 for refusal of defendant to divert at an intermediate point a carload of merchandise forwarded over defendant’s railway line and consigned to plaintiff at Minneapolis. Thé case was tried before Dickinson, J., who found in favor of plaintiff for the sum demanded. From an or■der denying a motion for a new trial, defendant appealed. The carrier delivers at his peril when there is an outstanding bill of lading. A change of destination is as much a change of delivery as a change in the party to whom it is to be delivered. And it is…

1Opinion of the CourtLovely, J.

Damages are sought in this action for the failure of a railway carrier to comply with a request by the consignee of a car of apples to divert it while in transit at a point between the place of shipment and its destination. The cause was tried to the court, who made findings of fact and ordered judgment for plaintiff for the amount claimed in the complaint. There was a denial of a motion for new trial, from which order defendant appeals.

Upon the findings of fact, amply supported by the evidence, it appears that the firm of Johnson & Co., of Diamonds, in the state of Washington, shipped a…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Ratzer v. Burlington, Cedar Rapids & Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1896
  2. Bank of Litchfield v. ElliottSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1901

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Cleveland C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Southern Coal & Coke Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Coal & Coke Ry. Co. v. Buckhannon River Coal & Coke Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1915
  3. Patton v. Texas & P. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1911
  4. CHICAGO, M., ST. P. & PR CO. v. FlandersCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1932
  5. Estherville Produce Co. v. Chicago, R. I. & P. R.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1932

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API